Should add Reddit. Started out as FOSS, closed down their GitHub, then killed their API which killed dozens of third party integrations impacting hundreds of thousands of users.
The funny thing is that since it’s an actual word the spell checker might not be of any use to see that it might not be the word you’re actually wanting to use. And with the amount of people using “payed” instead of “paid” the dictionaries will probably include “payed” as an alternative way to conjugate “to pay” in the currency sense.
They now require a special power supply for it to work else it just crashes under load. Their use of USB C is insanely confusing because it doesn’t work with any normal USB C psu.
This power supply costs 15 bucks which conveniently isn’t included in the price. Also a heat sink that costs 6 bucks.
Also they stuck with micro hdmi which sucks. (even more special accessories needed)
The required accessories almost cost as much as just an old pi.
I hope the community jumps over to Rockchip based boards soon. Pi has taken the communities open source efforts and spit in their face.
Risc5 is also interesting but that seems to be a far bigger task since it need recompilation of a lot of existing stuff
Is there a RasPi alternative that’s competitive in price and has PCI-e support? It’s been a dream project of mine for quite some time to pair an ultra low power SoC to a GPU in order to make a crazy overpowered Folding@Home or BOINC cluster.
I could say the Orange Pi 5, however Orange Pi’s ports currently tend to only work with specific accessories which they already wrote drivers for themselves. It’s not like they’re blocking other devices, but just like how RPI still needs a lot of work to support GPU’s with drivers, Orange Pi probably needs even more.
The integrated GPU is pretty good though.
Most alternatives to RPI use a Rockchip such as the RK3566 for mid range and RK3588 for high end stuff.
There’s also the new cheap 15 bucks LuckFox Pico with Rockchip RV1106 with a small NPU for AI projects, kind of a Pi Pico alternative.
Thank you for your recommendation. I’ve looked at some of those SoCs and they’re impressive but none of them do what I’m looking for. I want to make a graveyard for my old GPUs, but without the power overhead I have right now with them configured as essentially a mining rig that’s folding proteins instead of guessing the hash. I understand that the potential power saved by using ARM or RISC over x86/64 is a few dozen watts at best and chosing an SoC over a desktop platform hamstrings any opportunity for scaling, but it’s been a dream project of mine for quite some time. It doesn’t have to be practical.
Whenever I am doing different projects I go with RasPi alternatives. I agree they’re cheaper and superior.
Wow, at the start of this comment i thought you were just being overly negative, but one by one, each point crushed me a little more. it’s so sad what’s become of this once great little product. The special power supply is a complete and total deal breaker for so many reasons. that eliminated so many use cases for me. And the lack of a standard hdmi port (or even usb c video output) is just the shtty cherry on top.
Yeah power seems like such a small thing but for an SBC it’s a pretty big deal.
The power usage is also pretty crushing for it the Pi’s usage in hobby Robotics. Finally we have some computing power but now it’s unusable because how are you going to get 5V5A from a powerbank? We could power the Pi4 from a decent USB C supporting powerbank, But this is no longer the case for the Pi5.
If they supported “normal” USB PD then at least a powerbank with quick-charge support (9v3a) would work and give you the same total 25W wattage. And the PD USB chargers would have been way cheaper because 9v3A get mass produced. This 5V5A is some Apple tier of “propriatary” standard and I really wonder why they did it.
I refuse to admit 5v5a is USB PD. This is like USB3.1gen2by4 Rev 9001
USB PD was meant for
15w = 5v3a
30w = 9v3a
45w =15v3a
60-100w = 20v3-5a
Phones that wanted to do it different made up their own name with blackjack and WOOX charging. I don’t need the Pi foundation single handedly screwing this up.
Even the recommended 5V3A supply for the Pi4 is non-standard and requires you to either buy the official power brick or wade through a sea of sketchy Chinese knockoffs that may or may not deliver their rated power. I don’t understand why they haven’t explored alternative connectors or slapped a voltage regulator on the board in order to use a 12V supply. 5V5A USB is just ridiculous. USB only makes sense when you’re using universal requirements, but this might as well be a barrel connector as you can’t use any normal USB charger with it.
I’m assuming it’s like the Nintendo switch USBC lead which technically is standard but doesn’t really work to charge anything else. but at least you can use normal USBC leads to charge the switch so it’s not too bad.
I also try to get along with a small amount of software and I also mainly stick with default configurations. It is a great feeling when setting up a new PC or a device that there is little need to install a bunch of software and mess with a lot of configurations just to get my learned workflow up and running. Therefore there also isn’t really a need to follow new software releases.
You could still get the actual comics anywhere, convert em to .cbz, and chuck em in some folders named by series. In that sense, Tachiyomi should keep working forever.
It’s really only the streamlined online sources that’ll break over time, and no new features will get added.
Lucky for us, looks like it’ll be getting forked and live on as “Mihon”.
So does Tachiyomi also provide the external sources? My impression was they just did the app, and you got things from elsewhere, but I’ve never used it (or even heard of it before today).
It’s also already got 3 forks, they link them on their website.
Tachiyomi is just a comic reader, but it can aggregate from A LOT of sources, both local files and websites. Each online source (mangadex, tapas) requires a plug-in to work. Those plugins need maintenance and workarounds for stuff like cloudflare blocks.
Needless to say a lot of content hosts aren’t fans of a client that pulls content without the user ever seeing an ad or something, so these plug-ins tend to break.
There’s a number of existing forks already. Most of them for porn. For the ones that have integrated with the last Tachiyomi update that removed native extensions, what you’ll be able to do is set a repository as an upstream apk source for whatever extensions you want. There’s plenty of those already on github. You just have to look for them.
I still have apps that I made to work on android 6, working just fine. Android has extremely good backwards compatibility.
The reason tachiyomis plug-ins would stop working is that the sources they pull content from keep blocking them, and there wouldn’t be anyone to come up with new workarounds.
Android itself hasn’t changed that much unless your app is overly reliant on old app permissions. Which tachiyomi isn’t.
I think pi is on the road to mainstream. Probably time to shift to an open source hardware competitor to boost it. Not saying pi is bad, I have one and its great. Those like me who love tinkering should consider going the extra mile and „radicalize“ themselves to open hardware. The project I hear the most of is Banana-PI. www.banana-pi.org
Most alternatives use Rockchips such as Rk3566 or 3588 which are better in every way to the Pi chips of their respective price points. As long as they don’t use the Allwinner chips it’s usually decent out of the box but still a bit lacking.
I like Orange Pi more. They have pretty good out of the box documentation and a good range of hardware.
Radxa is also an option but they seem to offer the same stuff as Orange Pi but more expensive.
I used a lepotato on my last project in place of a pi3 but libre computer totally has rockchip boards available as well. Price wise seemed decent, documentation was decent enough for me and more importantly I could actually get one.
This to me is a good question. The lack of something concrete that sounds like “yes, that would definitely work” is something that makes me have reservations about this whole thesis… but that said I think it has some merit.
Mysql and Qt already have a pretty solid model, where there’s a GPL-enabled alternative that the community can use, or you can pay a fee to use the commercial version. You could scale that up to something where if you want to pay a certain fee, you can use lots of currently-GPL software (maybe any that’s been assigned to the FSF or something with the FSF shepherding the whole thing). Then, we can stop the sort of benign neglect of companies that are sloppy with their licensing of uboot or Busybox, and just tell them to start paying the fee if they don’t feel like dotting all their "i"s as far as licensing, and then use the fees to fund development of open source software that’s needed but doesn’t have a lot of motivated developers working on it.
I’m not as convinced that it’s necessary as Perens is. Like I think he overblows by quite a lot the impact of RHEL skirting their licensing, because in his mind RHEL is such a big part of the computing world when in reality it’s not. But it sounds like he’s describing real problems and the solutions make some version of good sense to me.
This is a common misconception. A couple times, it’s even gone to court. Both Cisco and Best Buy had to pay nontrivial amounts of money, and in the case of Best Buy, it hilariously had to give to the plaintiffs its inventory of TVs which contained software copyrighted and GPL-licensed by the plaintiffs.
GPL licensed does not in any world mean “completely free for anyone to use”. For end-users, it does. For companies that want to resell the GPL-licensed software, it means, you can do it for free if you comply with the terms of the license, and if you don’t, then you can’t. There’s not a monetary exchange, but there are licensing terms you need to comply with which were apparently important enough to the people that wrote the software for them to apply that particular license instead of some other one.
If you disagree, that’s completely fine, but that doesn’t mean you can all of a sudden resell their software and use their work for free, even if there are other people (in compliance with the license) who can.
They were selling TVs with GPL-licensed software inside without complying with the terms of the GPL. When challenged, their defense was some version of “But it’s completely free for anyone to use!”
They didn’t have to give up every one of their TVs of any model, just the infringing models (the ones that used Busybox without complying with the GPL).
IANAL and I don’t have the actual court papers, but is seems to me they were violating GPLv2 Section 6.
Essentially, what this section says is that if you distribute a chunk of software (in this case, the firmware embedded in a smart TV) that in its compiled form contains part or all of a software library covered by this license (in this case, Busybox, which is a bundle of common shell utilities you use every day in a Linux terminal, compacted into one binary to fit onto embedded systems), you have to do one of these four things:
Package the source code of the GPL’d library with the distribution itself. If your executable contains a version of it modified by you, those modifications must be in the source. In this case this would require putting the raw source code for Busybox on the TV itself in a place the user could access it, or perhaps bundling a flash drive with the source code on it with the TV.
Include a written offer to send the source to anyone who asks for it, at no cost (except for the cost of transfer itself if applicable, e.g. postage), and honor that offer for at least 3 years. I believe this is what most companies that use GPL’d code do.
If the distribution happens at a designated place, offer the source at that same place. This is mostly relevant to download pages, not physical products.
Verify that the customer already has a copy of the source distributed in advance. This is a specific edge case that makes no sense in this context.
This lawsuit was brought about because the sellers of the TVs that contained Busybox were not doing any of the above four things, and those sellers ignored or ghosted plaintiff when plaintiff contacted them about it.
Violating the (spirit of) the license (without violating the letter, because of loopholes in the license) is exactly what Perens is talking about.
He’s not “complaining he isn’t getting paid.” I think it’s pretty rare that the people working on open source software are actually hurting for money or anything. He’s complaining that the actual practice of how the software is being used, RHEL and Android on phones and etc, isn’t doing well at reflecting the vision of the computing world the GPL was supposed to create. Then, as one possible solution, he’s proposing to kill two birds with one stone with a new license where the companies that are skirting the license right now can have to fund the development of particular types of open source software that need to get done anyway but is lacking right now (because of lack of profit motive).
You might or might not agree with his thesis; as much as I think it’s interesting and insightful I have some reservations about it. I just thought you were misunderstanding his whole argument as being in terms of money, that’s all.
GPL isn’t the only open source license. This comment is beyond bizarre because it seems to imply that all open source software is GPL? And of course when software is licensed as GPL, that license can be enforced when someone breaks it (like your example). The original comment never mentioned GPL, it was about when something was licensed ss free. So when you give an example where it wasn’t licensed as such, what was the point?
From the link, Best Buy paid $90,000. That’s awesome! Wouldn’t there be a ton of opportunity in suing these big, careless companies that are violating open source? Seems like this would be “the solution”
I think mostly they prefer for people to just fix their delivery to comply with the license, as opposed to causing antagonism towards the community by going straight to a lawsuit. But yes, there are definitely teeth to it if some company for whatever reason doesn’t want to fix their infringement.
There’s no debate. LLMs are plagiarism with extra steps. They take data (usually illegally) wholesale and then launder it.
A lot of people have been doing research into the ethics of these systems and that’s more or less what they found. The reason why they’re black boxes is precisely the reason we all suspected; they were made that way because if they weren’t we’d all see them for what they are.
The reason they are blackboxes is because they are function approximators with billions of parameters. Theory has not caught up with practical results. This is why you tune hyperparameters (learning rate, number of layers, number of neurons ina layer, etc.) and have multiple iterations of training to get an approximation of the distribution of the inputs. Training is also sensitive to the order of inputs to the network. A network trained on the same training set but in a different order might converge to an entirely different function. This is why you train on the same inputs in random order over multiple episodes to hopefully average out such variations. They are blackboxes simply because you can’t yet prove theoretically the function it has approximated or converged to given the input.
I moved all my open source projects to Gitlab the day Microsoft announced they were acquiring Github.
(I wish in retrospect I’d taken the time to research and decide on the right host. I likely would have gone to Codeberg instead of Gitlab had I done so. But Gitlab’s still better than Github. And I don’t really know for sure that Codeberg was even around back when Microsoft acquired Github.)
I’m not really sure it is. I just wish I’d shopped around before jumping to Gitlab, really.
It kindof feels like Gitlab’s aims are more commercial and Codeberg’s are more in line with the FOSS movement, but that’s just a vague sense I have based on things I’ve seen but no longer remember specifically.
CalcProgrammer1’s response to my post seems pretty informative and apropos, though.
Thank you I missed when they added this. I only track a very old FR for rpm support and was sure that situation is similar with other repos. However gitea/forgejo supports more formats including rpm.
Yeah, good thought. The only reason I haven’t is just because I worry that moving constantly might deter people from using any of my FOSS projects. Just seems like it could be considered a red flag (a sign of a “bad” or poorly-managed project) to some. (And… well… given that I didn’t do the research when I moved those projects, it wouldn’t be an entirely inaccurate conclusion to draw.)
Oh, I guess also I’d need to log back into my Github and change everything that says “moved to Gitlab” to say “moved to Codeberg” and update links. (I literally force-pushed to overwrite the entire history of my Github projects with a single commit each with just a README that says it moved to Gitlab with a link.)
Plus, if I really looked into it, I might decide I’d prefer to self-host on something like Gitea.
I guess all that to say I’d definitely want to put more thought into it before migrating any particular place a second time. Doing the actual move is indeed the easy part, but there’s a lot of thought and research to do before that. And a lot of meta-considerations to take into account.
Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?
Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?
Basically the fact that they are in Europe and for now they are free (even if I am planning to contribute some euros) and without all the “every site need to be a social network” facade (like Github).
All the features I need are present and I were not using the missing one anyway (like the CI). And I like to support an EU company ;-)
Additionally it is a couple of years that I am trying to move away from US companies for every service I use, the move from Gitlab to Codeberg is the last one and came natural.
My first impression of gitlab was offputting because I was using hardened firefox and couldnt get past through cloudflare so I ended up using github. It was also better ui wise but now its just a mess
Edit: slowly i’m starting to move everything to codeberg
I still left my old and unmaintained projects on GitHub but I moved all my active projects to GitLab and any new projects go there too. I have them auto mirrored back to GitHub though as the more mirrors the better. I also recently set up a Codeberg mirror for some of my projects, though GitLab’s CI is what is keeping me on GitLab even though they nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back. Still hate them for that and if Codeberg gets a solid CI option, leaving GitLab would make me happy. They too have seen quite a lot of enshittification in the years since Microsoft bought GitHub.
Drastically nerfed the quotas. FOSS projects with a valid license used to have GitLab Premium access to shared runners and now even FOSS projects with a valid license get a rather useless 400 minutes. They also require new accounts to add CC info just to use that paltry sum which means FOSS projects can’t rely on CI passing on forks to ensure a merge request passes the checks before merging, as even if you have project specific runners set up forks don’t use them and neither to MRs.
I wish companies didn’t offer what they can’t support from the beginning rather than this embrace, extend, extinguish shit. I guess in GitLab’s case there was no extend, it was just embrace FOSS projects and let them set up CI pipelines and get projects depending on the shared CI runners as part of merge request workflow for a few years and then extinguish by yoinking that access away and fucking over everyone’s workflow, leaving us scrambling to set up project side runners and ruining checks on MRs.
Translation: our legal team has to justify their employment, thus we’re threatening non-profit open source projects that can’t fight back and pose no harm whatsoever to the company’s financials, market position, customers, or any other stakeholder.
It’d be awesome if the maintainers could get a pro bono advice / representation here to make a proper response. They’re volunteering their free time improving an extensive list of crappy products of a brand and this is what they get back? Disgusting move from Haier.
opensource
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.